Slickest weasels

David Aaranovitch gets it right yet again, not that it will make a difference:

And now we have seen the Attorney General's advice from 7 March, which was
widely leaked to the media as being a series of severe misgivings about the
legality of war. In fact, it was nothing of the kind. To spin the advice, as
many journalists have done, as showing that Goldsmith was saying that war 'could
be illegal' is disingenuousness worthy of the slickest weasel. The advice shows,
crucially, that the Attorney General thought that UN Resolution 1441 probably
was permissive of military action against Iraq, without further decision of the
Security Council.

That is the central point on which he disagreed with
many (but by no means all) international lawyers. On 17 March, his judgment,
firmed up by the government's assessment of Unscom's report on Iraqi
non-compliance, and his reasons for coming to that judgment, was published in
summary.

So where was the 'lie' about the advice? In practical terms,
the answer hardly matters. Those who loathe Blair and do not care to be fair
about this question will argue that he will get away with it in any case and
will lament the moral turpitude of the British. But I regret the fact that most
people will never know that there wasn't anything much to get away with, and
that the words 'liar' and 'cheat' will remain in the popular consciousness,
unexamined.